After a trial, the court overruled an objection to one claim and sustained objections to two others, disallowing them. The claims were not entitled to a presumption of validity, and the alleged creditors were unable to carry the burden of persuasion.
You are here
The District of Nebraska offers a database of opinions for the years 1997 to 2011, listed by year and judge. For a more detailed search, enter the keyword or case number in the search box above.
Subscribe to our opinions RSS feed
The court found that the debtors intentionally excluded significant debts from their loan application to mislead the lender and induce it to approve the loan. The debt remaining after the sale of the collateral was non-dischargeable under § 523(a)(2)(B).
A lender who cannot produce the promissory note it is attempting to foreclose and takes the position that the note is lost must comply with Neb. U.C.C. § 3-309 and prove by clear and convincing evidence that it no longer has possession of the instrument.
The presumption of insolvency in this preference action was unrebutted by the defendant after the trustee showed that the schedules didn’t truly reflect asset values. However, a question of fact existed as to the ordinary course of business defense.
The court overruled debtors’ objection to the IRS’s claim for tax penalties related to failure to timely file returns. Neither poor health nor debtors’ belief that they didn’t need to file returns constituted “good cause” for not filing the returns.
The court discharged the debt to the bank. Although the debtor listed as collateral certain items he did not own but was in the process of buying, there was no evidence of intent to deceive, nor did the bank rely on that representation in making the loan.
The court denied the trustee’s motion for summary judgment on claims concerning preferential transfers. There was a question as to the insider status of one of the defendant transferees, as well as issues of affirmative defenses under § 547(c).
The debtor could not strip off the junior lien on her home because the record indicated there was sufficient equity in the property to secure a portion of that lien. The debtor did not submit any evidence, so the court relied on the bankruptcy schedules.
The court dismissed the debtor’s case because the amount of noncontingent, liquidated, unsecured debt exceeded the Chapter 13 debt limit in § 109(e). Debtor’s assertion of claims against the creditor did not change the liquidated nature of the debt.
An unsecured junior lien on the debtor’s residential real estate may be avoided after the debtor completes Chapter 13 plan payments. The case law in the Eighth Circuit, interpreting Nobelman, permits wholly unsecured liens to be stripped off.